alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 71 (Friday, April 13, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 18731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7077]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2006-23687]


Notice of Informational Filing

    For informational purposes only, the Federal Railroad 
Administration (FRA) is providing notice that it has received an 
informational filing from BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) to test the next 
version of the railroad's Electronic Train Management System (ETMS) 
submitted pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 
236.913. The informational filing is described below, including the 
submitting party and the requisite docket number where the 
informational filing and any related information may be found. The 
document is also available for public inspection; however, FRA is not 
accepting public comment on the document.

BNSF Railway Company (BNSF)

[Docket Number FRA-2006-23687]

    BNSF has submitted an informational filing to FRA to continue 
operational testing of the next version of the railroad's ETMS. This 
continued testing will allow BNSF to obtain the necessary information 
required to amend its current Product Safety Plan (PSP) for a future 
submittal to the FRA. The informational filing has been placed in the 
Docket Number FRA-2006-23687, and is available for public inspection.
    All documents in the public docket are available for examination 
during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the DOT Central Docket 
Management Facility, Room Pl-401 (Plaza Level), 400 Seventh Street, 
SW., Washington, DC. All documents in the public docket are also 
available for inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket 
facility's Web site at http://dms.dot.gov.
    You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 
19477-78). The Statement may also be found at http://dms.dot.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 9, 2007.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program 
Development.
 [FR Doc. E7-7077 Filed 4-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
# C_2008012EN.01000201.xml

| 17.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 12/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 12/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

16 January 2008

(2008/C 12/03)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4792 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 157,29 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4461 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,75400 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4194 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6142 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 96,15 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9420 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,051 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 255,18 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6979 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,6021 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,7155 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 33,465 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7356 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6806 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5122 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,5344 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9255 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1142 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 390,52 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,2508 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,6982 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3424 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 971,04 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8348 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 60,233 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 36,0410 |
| THB | Thai baht | 43,930 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6127 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,2039 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4792

JPY

Japanese yen

157,29

DKK

Danish krone

7,4461

GBP

Pound sterling

0,75400

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4194

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6142

ISK

Iceland króna

96,15

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9420

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,051

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

255,18

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6979

PLN

Polish zloty

3,6021

RON

Romanian leu

3,7155

SKK

Slovak koruna

33,465

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7356

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6806

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5122

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,5344

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9255

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1142

KRW

South Korean won

1 390,52

ZAR

South African rand

10,2508

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,6982

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3424

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 971,04

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8348

PHP

Philippine peso

60,233

RUB

Russian rouble

36,0410

THB

Thai baht

43,930

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6127

MXN

Mexican peso

16,2039

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to**

**Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934**

 

I, Adrian Adams, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Aralez Pharmaceuticals Inc.; and

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 
| Date:  March 31,   2016 |                            |
|----------------------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                                   | /s/ Adrian Adams                |
|                                   | Adrian Adams                    |
|                                   | Chief Executive Officer         |
|                                   | (principal executive   officer) |

 

----
Exhibit 31.3





Certification of Chief Executive Officer





I, David L. French, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Rosehill Resources Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2018; and





2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.





By:/s/ David L. FrenchName:David L. FrenchTitle:President and Chief Executive Officer





Date: June 21, 2019
Case: 2:12-cv-00231-EAS-EPD Doc #: 27 Filed: 02/15/13 Page: 1 of 2  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:12-cv-00231-EAS-EPD Doc #: 27 Filed: 02/15/13 Page: 2 of 2  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-12T10:19:08-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
(logo) Rialto CAPITAL

 

 

**2016 Annual Statement ofServicer Compliance (Item 1123)**

 

 

Pooling and ServicingAgreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as ofAugust 1, 2015 by and among Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.as Depositor, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, NationalAssociation as Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as SpecialServicer, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC as Operating Advisor, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association as Certificate Administrator and Wells Fargo Bank,National Association as Trustee relating to the Credit Suisse First BostonMortgage Securities Corp., CSAIL 2015-C3 Commercial Mortgage Trust, CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series  2015-C3 **(CSAIL 2015-C3)**

 

 

The undersigned, a dulyauthorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the“Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1.  All servicingactivities and performance of such servicing activities under the Pooling andServicing Agreement are performed on behalf of the Special Servicer.

 

2.  A review of theservicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer for the period ofJanuary 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”) inaccordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under mysupervision.

 

3.  To the best ofmy knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all ofits obligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in allmaterial respects for the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure tofulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and thenature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certified by: /s/ AdamSinger                                                 Date: March 1, 2017

Adam Singer, Managing Director
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-50718 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee
v. JESUS ESPARZA PIZANA Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:06-CR-1032-ALL Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jesus E sparza Pizana raises arguments that are foreclosed by A lmendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. U nited States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 5, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
III 

Calendar No. 601 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 71 

[Report No. 109–333] 

Expressing the sense of Congress that States should require candidates for 

driver’s licenses to demonstrate an ability to exercise greatly increased 

caution when driving in the proximity of a potentially visually impaired 

individual. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 15, 2005 

Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. SALAZAR, Mr. THUNE, Mr. 

DEWINE, Mr. JOHNSON, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. STEVENS, 

and Mr. MENENDEZ) submitted the following concurrent resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2006 

Reported by Mr. STEVENS, without amendment 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that States should require 

candidates for driver’s licenses to demonstrate an ability 

to exercise greatly increased caution when driving in 

the proximity of a potentially visually impaired individual. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•SCON 71 RS

Whereas many people in the United States who are blind or 

otherwise visually impaired have the ability to travel 

throughout their communities without assistance; 

Whereas visually impaired individuals encounter hazards that 

a pedestrian with average vision could easily avoid, many 

of which involve crossing streets and roadways; 

Whereas the white cane and guide dog should be generally 

recognized as aids to mobility for visually impaired individuals; 

Whereas many States do not require candidates for driver’s 

licenses to associate the use of the white cane or guide 

dog with potentially visually impaired individuals; and 

Whereas visually impaired individuals have had their white 

canes and guide dogs run over by motor vehicles, have 

been struck by the side view mirrors of motor vehicles, 

and have suffered serious personal injury and death as 

the result of being hit by motor vehicles: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that each 

3 State should require any candidate for a driver’s license 

4 in such State to demonstrate, as a condition of obtaining 

5 a driver’s license, an ability to associate the use of the 

6 white cane and guide dog with visually impaired individ7 uals and to exercise greatly increased caution when driving 

8 in proximity to a potentially visually impaired individual. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS

rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
Calendar No. 601 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 71 

[Report No. 109

–333] 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that States 

a potentially visually impaired individual. creased caution when driving in the proximity of demonstrate an ability to exercise greatly inshould require candidates for driver’s licenses to 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2006 

Reported without amendment 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-4064

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MARLON PORTER, a/k/a Marlon McKoy, a/k/a Marlo,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Wilmington. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (7:20-cr-00029-M-1)

Submitted: April 14, 2022 Decided: April 19, 2022

Before DIAZ and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marlon Porter, Appellant Pro Se. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM: 

Marlon Porter seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying in part and granting 

in part his four pretrial motions to suppress in his ongoing criminal proceedings. This court 

may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory 

and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. 

Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Porter seeks to appeal is neither a 

final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the 

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
# Official Journal C 167/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 167 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 644 May 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 167

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 644 May 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2021/C 167/01 | Position (EU) No 13/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Justice Programme and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013Adopted by the Council on 19 April 2021 | 1 |
| 2021/C 167/02 | Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 13/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Justice Programme and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013 | 17 |

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COUNCIL

2021/C 167/01

Position (EU) No 13/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Justice Programme and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013Adopted by the Council on 19 April 2021

1

2021/C 167/02

Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 13/2021 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Justice Programme and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1382/2013

17

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CEO PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Trinity Capital Corporation, a New Mexico corporation (“Trinity”), for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), William C. Enloe, as President and Chief Executive Officer of Trinity, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Trinity. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| /s/ William C. Enloe                  |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| William C. Enloe                      |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |
| May 11, 2009                          |
<PAGE>

                                EXHIBIT (10)(b)
                                ---------------


                        OPINION AND CONSENT OF ACTUARY
<PAGE>

               [Transamerica Life Insurance Company Letterhead]

April 10, 2001


Transamerica Life Insurance Company
4333 Edgewood Road NE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52499-0001

Re:  Retirement Builder Variable Annuity Account (formerly PFL Retirement
     Builder Variable Annuity Account) Registration on Form N-4
     SEC File No. 333-78743

Dear Sir/Madam:

With regard to the above registration statement, I have examined such documents
and made such inquiries as I have deemed necessary and appropriate, and on the
basis of such examination, have the following opinions:

Fees and charges deducted under The One Income Annuity policies are those deemed
necessary to appropriately reflect:

(1)  the expenses incurred in the acquisition and distribution of the Policies,

(2)  the expenses associated with the development and servicing of the policies,

(3)  the assumption of certain risks arising from the operation and management
     of the Policies and that provides for a reasonable margin of profit.

Fees and charges assessed include:

(i)  Separate Account Charge

(ii) Taxes (including Premium and other Taxes if applicable)

The magnitude of each of the individual charges listed above in (i) through (ii)
is established in the pricing of the One Income Annuity, to achieve a reasonable
Return on Investment (ROI), which is within the range of industry practice with
respect to comparable variable immediate annuity products.
<PAGE>

Transamerica Life Insurance Company
Page 2
April 10, 2001


Except by coincidence, it is not expected that actual charges assessed in a
given year would exactly offset actual expenses incurred.  Acquisition expenses
(as well as major product and/or systems development expenses) are incurred "up
front" and recovered, with a reasonable profit margin, through future years'
charges.  In addition, the company cannot increase certain charges under the
Policies in the pricing process.

Therefore, in my opinion, the fees and charges deducted under the Policies, in
the aggregate, are reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses
expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the company.

I hereby consent to the use of this opinion, which is included as an Exhibit to
the Registration Statement.



/s/ Roger Freeman
-----------------
Roger Freeman, MAAA
Vice President
Transamerica Life Insurance Company
(formerly PFL Life Insurance Company)
APPENDIX S-A-2

SEGMENT 4C ALIGNMENT

S-A-2-1
S-A-2-2
S-A-2-3
S-A-2-4
S-A-2-5
S-A-2-6
S-A-2-7
S-A-2-8
S-A-2-9
S-A-2-10
S-A-2-11
S-A-2-12
S-A-2-13
S-A-2-14
S-A-2-15
S-A-2-16
S-A-2-17
S-A-2-18
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10107 Conference Calendar

WILLIAM STEVE MCGREW, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus GEORGE W. BUSH; TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES; GARY L. JOHNSON, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:97-CV-254

- - - - - - - - - - June 16, 1998 Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * William Steve McGrew, Texas prisoner #374537, is BARRED from proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP) under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) because, on at least three prior occasions while incarcerated, McGrew has brought an action or appeal in a United States Court that was dismissed as frivolous or forNo. 98-10107 -2- failure to state a claim. See McGrew v. Texas Bd. of Pardons and Paroles , 47 F.3d 158 (5th Cir. 1995)(affirming the district court’s dismissal of § 1983 complaint for failure to state a claim); McGrew v. Rodriguez , No. 94-11042 (5th Cir. Jan. 26, 1995)(unpublished)(dismissal of appeal as frivolous); McGrew v. Bush , No. 97-10198 (5th Cir. Dec. 17, 1997) (unpublished) (dismissal of complaint in district court as frivolous and dismissal of appeal as frivolous). See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, McGrew’s IFP status is DECERTIFIED, and he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is in prison unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). The appeal is DISMISSED. McGrew has 15 days from the date of this opinion to pay the full appellate filing fee of $105 to the clerk of the district court, should he wish to reinstate his appeal.
IFP DECERTIFIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.